CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE

A PHILOSOPHER

“Without philosophy we should be little above the animals

that dig or erect their habitations”
-Voltaire Antiquity Sec. V

The Shallow Pond

Imagine that you are a college professor
and there is a path from the library
at your university to the Humanities
© Luis Louro/Shutterstock, Inc.

Lecture Hall which passes a shallow

ornamental pond. On your way to give a
lecture, you notice that a small child has
fallen in and is in danger of drowning.
If you wade in and pull the child out, it
will mean getting your clothes muddy

1
 and either cancelling your lecture or delaying it until you can find
something clean and dry to wear. If you pass by the child, so you may
give your lecture on time, the child will die.1a What would you do?
(Refer to questions 1 to 3 at the end of this chapter.)

The Envelope
In your mailbox, there is a letter from the United
States Committee for UNICEF, a world organization
whose mission is to help less fortunate children from
less developed countries. After reading the letter,
you researched the organization and know that it
is not a “scam” and that 100% of all donations go
to their intended “victims.” Therefore, you correctly
believe that unless you send a $100 check, instead
© africa924/Shutterstock, Inc.)

of each child living, over thirty more children will

die soon without your contribution. Make no other
assumptions; just deal with whether or not you
would send the money.1b Would you send the $100?
(Refer to questions 1 to 4 at the end of this chapter.)

Ethics and Values

It has been said that Diogenes of Sinope (c. 400 BCE) roamed the streets
with a lantern looking for an honest man.2 Legend has it that he never
found such a person. It is no wonder that there is such cynicism toward
business ethics. Just turn to the pages of the New York Times, Los Angeles
Times, or the Chicago Tribune and a day will not go by without an article
about a business or businessperson who is facing charges or is being
questioned about unethical conduct during the course of employment.
As a businessperson, will you be able to take the moral high road, or be
no different than the Voltaire quote above referring to the metaphorical
unethical lower road?

In the first case, “The Shallow Pond,” the action you would take may be
easier to determine, so at this point you will have passed the litmus test
2 Conducting Business Ethically
for ethical decision making. Yet, when it meant facing unemployment
by missing a class observation, which would result in you losing tenure,
did you find your moral compass somewhat shakier? What about the
second case, “The Envelope,” where there is no clear-cut answer, yet
your response will affect the lives of thirty children, not one?

In the business world, you will be faced with a multitude of decisions

every day. In each case, the course of action you take and how ethical this
course of action is will differ, depending on the situation’s complexity
and your own moral compass. The famous Greek philosopher Heraclitus
once said, “You cannot step into the same river twice, for other waters
are continually flowing on.” Each day we are faced with a changing river
flow of ethical dilemmas and have to determine whether our personal
desires or ego will compromise our personal moral compass. But as
Aristotle believed, just because we fall down ethically one time, does not
mean the next time faced with a similar situation, we cannot make the
wiser, ethical choice.

©Cartoonresource/Shutterstock, Inc.

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 3

 The purpose of this book is to examine your actions and compare them
to the standards of morality that we would expect others in our situation
would live up to. But, what or who determines these standards and
whether we even want to fulfill them, is an even more complex issue.
Furthermore, if we decide to follow these moral standards, how can
we also satisfy the goals of our business or employer? Throughout this
book, various approaches will be used to help answer these questions.
Although there may not be any right or wrong answers, by applying
some of the philosophies and approaches included in this book, and
by reflecting upon your own motives before deciding on a particular
ethics course of action, it is expected that the quality of your decisions will be
is a branch of
optimized for all parties affected by your decision, including yourself.
philosophy that
identifies why and
if a particular For purposes of discussion, I will first refer to a few terms: ethics, ethical
moral standard
should be a moral dilemma, and values. Ethics is a branch of philosophy that identifies
standard. why and if a particular moral standard should be a moral standard. For
example, telling the truth is a moral standard; so is paying one’s debts,
ethical dilemma
a situation or deci-
not cheating one’s customers, and not stealing from a business. However,
sion affecting others as stated, the study of ethics examines why and if a particular action
when there may should be a moral standard. Whether to miss a class in order to save a
not be an obvious
solution in terms drowning child or attend the class and not save the child as discussed in
of what is the right the scenario earlier, is called an ethical dilemma. An ethical dilemma is
thing to do.
a situation or decision where there is no obvious solution in terms of what
values is the right thing to do. In the study of ethics, the potential actions (such
which you believe as whether to save the drowning child) are weighed against certain
in and are then
compared to one or
values. Values are those things you believe in and compare to one or more
more moral stan- moral standards, which would enable you to make the most ethical choice.
dards, which would Examples of values include friendship, religion, and money. It has been
enable you to make
the most ethical said that Socrates believed that unexamined life is not worth living.3 In
choice. Examples the following activity, you will be given the opportunity to examine your
may be: friendship,
religion, money.
own values.

4 Conducting Business Ethically

 The Alligator River Story4
Once upon a time there was a woman
named Abigail who was in love with

© Rudy Umans/Shutterstock, Inc.

a man named Gregory. Gregory lived
on the shore of a river. Abigail lived
on the opposite shore of the river. The
river that separated the two lovers was
teeming with man-eating alligators.
Abigail wanted to cross the river to
be with Gregory. Unfortunately, the
bridge had been washed out. So she went to Sinbad, a river boat
captain, to take her across. He said he would be glad to if she would
consent to go to bed with him preceding the voyage. She promptly
refused and went to a friend named Ivan to explain her plight. Ivan
did not want to be involved at all in the situation. Abigail felt her
only alternative was to accept Sinbad’s terms. Sinbad fulfilled his
promise to Abigail and delivered her into the arms of Gregory.

When she told Gregory about her amorous escapade in order to cross
the river, Gregory cast her aside with disdain. Heartsick and dejected,
Abigail turned to Slug for her tale of woe. Slug, feeling compassion
for Abigail, sought out Gregory and beat him brutally. Abigail was
overjoyed at the sight of Gregory getting his due. As the sun sets on
the horizon, we hear Abigail laughing at Gregory.

You may want to discuss this with some of your classmates and friends
and see who they believe was the most moral, and rank them to the
least moral character. Responding to who you believe was the most
or least moral identifies your values. Identifying why these are values
reflects the study of ethics. Yet, how do we determine whose values are
right or in the case of the Alligator River story, which character was
most ethical? (See questions 1 to 3 at the end of the chapter.)

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 5

preconven-
tional level Moral Development
is based upon when
you are making Lawrence Kohlberg
decisions which the
determining factor When analyzing what would be the “right” or ethical thing to do, we
is how you are ben-
efited by that deci- first need to understand how moral reasoning is developed. According
sion (i.e. motivated to Piaget and, later on, Kohlberg and Gilligan, moral development is
by selfishness).
contingent upon the structure of one’s thinking over time.5 One must
conventional pass through stages to make an ethical decision, and the higher the stage
level you are at, the more developed you are. In his landmark study on moral
according to
Kohlberg’s model it
development, using only males, Lawrence Kohlberg developed six
is based upon when stages to identify levels of ethical development of an individual. These
you are making six stages were part of three levels: preconventional, conventional, and
a decision the
deciding factor is postconventional. On the preconventional level, your decision making
what others think of is based on how you will benefit by your decision (i.e., motivated by
your decision (what
will other people
selfishness). The conventional level is based upon what others think of
think?). In Gilligan’s your decision; and the postconventional level is based upon a higher
model it is based level of development when you act in a manner that is for the good of
upon doing what
is best for others humankind, and your motivation is not for any personal reward. The
and detrimentally first stage in the preconventional level was based upon punishment and
neglecting yourself.
obedience.6 In this stage, you make a decision based upon whether you
will be caught or not. We will use the characters of the “Alligator River
postconven-
tional level Story” to exemplify Kohlberg’s theory: If Abigail based her decision on
according to the the belief that Gregory would never find out, or if she did not go with
Kohlberg model, the
determining factor
Sinbad because Gregory would find out, she would be in the first stage.
when making a de- In the second stage, termed “instrumental-relativist orientation,” an
cision is based upon action is taken that will benefit another individual only if this person
a higher level of
development when obtains something in return.6 In this case, Sinbad demonstrated this
you act in a manner stage since the only way he would help Abigail get across the river would
which is for the good
of humankind, and
be if she would return the favor by having sexual relations with him. In
your motivation is other words, I will do something for you, if I can expect eventually you
not for any personal will do something for me.
reward or motivated
by what others
may think. In the In the conventional level, we have the third stage, termed “interpersonal
Gilligan model, it
is putting yourself
concordance,” where one does something ethical if he or she believes
ahead of others, not others will see them as “nice.”7 If Sinbad took Abigail to see Gregory,
to be selfish but to only because he wanted everyone to see him as a “good guy,” but would
be selfless.

6 Conducting Business Ethically

not have done so if no one else would know
that he helped Abigail, this would exemplify the
third stage. The fourth stage, “law and order,” is
based upon rules that society has set up.8 For
example, if Sinbad lacked a license to cross the
river and refused Abigail passage, even if it
meant “life and death,” because he did not want
to break the law, Sinbad would be categorized as
being in the fourth stage.

In the postconventional level, the fifth stage

appears, called the “social contract” stage. In

© Carlos Yudica/Shutterstock, Inc.

this stage, there is the view that even though
it is a law, it could possibly change given the
circumstances (as opposed to not changing in
the previous level).9 Using the example from
the fourth stage, if Abigail had to cross the river
because Gregory needed a kidney which she
could donate, and Sinbad, who lacked a nautical
license, took Abigail because he believed even if it was against the law,
if he was caught and explained his situation, perhaps he would not be
penalized for sailing without the required permit. The last stage, the
“universal-ethical principle orientation,” is more like a Golden Rule
concept of treating others as we would want to be treated and would
even be willing to risk something of value to stand up for these rights.10
In this situation, let us assume the river was very treacherous, but the
only way Gregory’s life may be saved would be to take Abigail on his
boat. If Sinbad did so to save Gregory’s life, he would be on the highest
stage of moral development according to Kohlberg’s theory.

Carol Gilligan
Carol Gilligan, who studied under Kohlberg, also developed a moral
development model. However, because Kohlberg’s study only involved
male subjects, women who were faced with some of Kohlberg’s standard
decisions found themselves unable to go beyond the third or fourth
stage of Kohlberg’s model. In her study, Gilligan included females and
developed an alternative model, identifying the same three levels that

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 7

 Kohlberg identified in his study, but differed in terms of the steps, which
enabled females to score on the postconventional level, which they could
not do under Kohlberg’s model. Gilligan found that girls who were faced
with some of Kohlberg’s ethical dilemmas seldom went beyond the third
or fourth stage of Kohlberg’s model.

Gilligan’s study uncovered a very important point. The reason females

scored lower than their male counterparts under Kohlberg’s model
was because women’s construction of a moral problem focuses upon
their obligation to care for others and be responsible to maintain good
relationships, as opposed to the males whose focus was on rules and
justice, where caring for others played little, if any, role in moral decision
making.11 So, those females who were faced with ethical dilemmas,
using Gilligan’s model of moral development, were found to be on a
higher level than if evaluated using Kohlberg’s model.

Gilligan’s model, like Kohlberg’s, had a preconventional level, marked by

caring for oneself without regard to others, which she termed “caring for
self.”12 However, before moving on to the next level, Gilligan identified
a transitional period which she termed “selfishness and responsibility,”
which recognized an attachment or connection to others. One example
may be if Abigail felt it would be too much trouble to see Gregory
(preconventional level) but started to think about how disappointed
Gregory may feel by not seeing her (transitional period). In this
transitional period, note how from being selfish, Abigail now weighs
her responsibilities to others and may have second thoughts about not
seeing Gregory, based upon his feelings.

Now, let us discuss another scenario demonstrating the “caring for others”
conventional stage, where Abigail wants to see Gregory because he is so
desperate to see her, so she will do anything necessary, in order not to
disappoint him. Unfortunately, when she asks Sinbad to take her, he will
only do so if she has sexual relations with him. Therefore, even though
Abigail believes very strongly in being monogamous to Gregory, at the
same time, she does not want Gregory to be disappointed. Complicating
the situation more, what If she believes it may take years before the bridge
can be rebuilt for her to see Gregory, can her action be seen as a higher level

8 Conducting Business Ethically

of moral development than Kohlberg’s model would show? According to
Gilligan, even though it (having relations with Sinbad) might be bad for
Abigail, since it is good for Gregory (he will be able to see Abigail), by
having sexual relations with Sinbad, Gilligan’s model might consider this
action to be at the conventional level, as opposed to Kohlberg’s model
who would consider it preconventional (instrumental relativist).13 It is
at this point that Abigail could be entering the next transitional phase,
“goodness to truth.”14 It should also be pointed out that having sexual
relations with Sinbad may or may not be accepted by Gregory, but at the
time her decision was made, Abigail’s thoughts were on doing whatever
was necessary to see Gregory and not disappoint him.

This transitional phrase begins with a reconsideration of the relationship

between oneself and others, where self-sacrifice in the service of caring
for others is being dishonest to oneself.15 Take the example of a woman
with five children who is pregnant by her husband. The husband then
announces that he is leaving her and does not want to be married to
her anymore. Assuming it is not against her religious beliefs to have an
abortion, she realizes that by not having an abortion she would have
six children, would not be able to take care of them or herself, but if by
having an abortion, she could continue to work and provide a stable
home that she could not if she had a sixth child. Using Abigail as an
example, let us assume that if she had sexual relations with Sinbad, she
would be depressed and would always feel dishonest, even though she
knows that Sinbad would never tell Gregory. This awareness may lead
her to refuse Sinbad’s offer and disappoint Gregory but would enable
her to enter into the final level, postconventional, marked by the ethic of
care and being responsible to oneself as to others.16 The best example to
substantiate why this is the highest level of moral development hinges
upon the belief that being selfless is not the same as being selfish. After
all, if you have ever been on an airplane, during the demonstration of
what happens if the oxygen mask falls down and you have a young child
sitting next to you, the flight attendants always tells you to put the mask
on yourself first and then on your child. Why? If you did not put it on
yourself first, it is possible that you could pass out and would not be able
to help your child and that would be irresponsible or selfish. The same

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 9

 applies with this postconventional level because fully, morally developed
individuals take care of themselves so they are able to take care of others.

Comparing the Kohlberg and Gilligan Model

Figure 1.1
Level Kohlberg Gilligan
Preconventional Stage 1: Punishment Caring for Self
and obedience (“If it is good for me, it
(“If I don’t get caught, I was the right choice.”)
will do it.”)
Stage 2: Instrumental- Transitional period:
relativist orientation Selfish to responsibility
(“I will do it for you, if (“Maybe I should think
you do something for of others.”)
me.”)
Conventional Stage 3: Interpersonal Caring for others
concordance (“Even if it is bad for me,
(“I better do it or others since it is good for you, I
will think I am not will do it.”)
nice.”)
Stage 4: Law and order Transitional period:
(“If it is a law, it has to be Goodness to truth
right.”) (“I wonder, if it is good
for others, is it also good
for me?”)
Postconventional Stage 5: Social contract Ethics of care
(“It may be against the (“It is alright to help
law, but maybe the law is yourself first, so you are
not right.”) able to help others.”)
Stage 6: Universal-
ethical principle
orientation
(“Despite personal risk,
I must do the right thing
to help others.”)

10 Conducting Business Ethically

The Moral Compass
The following chart (figure 1.2) identifies some of the approaches
that may be taken when faced with an ethical dilemma such as the
“Alligator River Story.” The first approach is biblical or religious law.
But, can we use religion in all situations to determine which would be
the best ethical course to take when faced with a decision such as the
one Abigail encountered? To begin with, although most religions may
look at Abigail’s actions with Sinbad as immoral (sexual relations before
marriage), there are other ethical dilemmas that we cannot depend solely
on religion to help us steer in the correct moral direction. For example,
if Sinbad did not have any preconditions but told Abigail that he could
only take her to see Gregory on a Saturday and she was a religious
person of the Jewish faith, her action may be considered immoral if she
sailed on this day. However, if she was a Roman Catholic, traveling on a
Saturday would be permissible and not a breach of ethics from a religious
point. Therefore, religion may not be an acceptable moral standard for
everyone because with each different religion, there may be a difference
in determining whether an act is ethical. Furthermore, if a person is an
atheist or agnostic, are they exempt from any moral standards or is their
bar of ethics any lower than those who practice their religions?

Perhaps, using constitutional or state law, as established and agreed

upon by society, could be a potential measurement of morality. After
all, if it is constitutionally sound or is statutorily permissible, why
wouldn’t it be ethical? However, slavery, prohibition of women’s rights,
and the prohibition of interracial marriages exemplifies why laws do not
guarantee ethicality for every given situation.

For the same reason, moral realism cannot be deemed an ethical

guide either, as there are several practices in business that have been
practical because they are acceptable but are not ethical. Examples
include: churning a client’s portfolio so you earn a commission for
doing so; corporate raiding underpriced stocks and after purchasing the
company, selling its assets for a profit while letting the firm’s employees
go; or allowing international child labor in order to keep up with your
competitor who also follows this practice.

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 11

 Instead, maybe we can look at humankind and trust that all people
have consciences and thus their guilt will prevent them from taking the
unethical action. Guilt “is both a cognitive and an emotional experience
that occurs when a person believes that he or she has violated a moral
standard and is responsible for that violation.”17 After all, “have you
ever done something unethical even though you knew it was wrong?” If
you or anyone else you know responds affirmatively, it can be strongly
argued that you cannot trust guilt (your conscience) to prevent you
from conducting an immoral action.

Another approach may be moral relativism, which may be defined

as “the idea that it is wrong to legislate morality because all morality
is subjective.”18 Essentially, this approach may be seen either as each
individual determines what constitutes an ethical action or society will
determine the moral action to take in a given situation. The problem
is that individuals may believe they are making moral decisions, when
in fact they are not. Look at an individual who steals money from a
company so his family may take a well, deserved vacation to Disneyland.
Or, what about how certain societies believe a women should not be
given the same opportunities as men? Both demonstrate why moral
relativism is not an acceptable approach to determine the best ethical
course of action when faced with an ethical dilemma.

This then bring us to our final approach, universal philosophy. There

are certain philosophies that may be used and would be accepted in
most societal circles. For example, Immanuel Kant believes that “you
never treat humanity as a means but always at the same time an ends.”19
He believed that you do not use people and should their positions be
reversed, would anyone want to be used for another’s advantage? Would
you like to find out that the only reason someone wanted you to take
them on a date was so you could drive them to their boyfriend’s house
only to leave you for him? There are several philosophies that could be
applied and still be accepted universally. It is based upon this premise,
which we will follow when deciding what the best ethical course of
action would be when faced with an ethical dilemma.

12 Conducting Business Ethically

The Moral Compass
Figure 1.2

Philosophy and Its Contemporary Branches

philosophy
means a lover of
What is philosophy? Philosophy literally means “lover of wisdom” wisdom and as a
(philos, love; sophos, wisdom). However, in his book First Philosophy, philosopher you
Andrew Bailey best expressed what it means to be philosophical in the continue to question
the assumptions
following passage: behind every claim
To be philosophical is to continue to question the and your most
basic beliefs about
assumptions behind every claim until we come to our reality, and then to
most basic beliefs about reality, and then to critically critically examine
examine those beliefs. 20 those beliefs

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 13

epistemology It is believed that the first Western philosophers such as Thales,
which includes ques-
Xenophanes, Pythagoras, and Heraclitus lived on the banks of the
tions about knowl-
edge such as, what is Mediterranean more than 2,500 years ago, while the first Eastern
knowledge and how philosophers such as Lao-Tzu were believed to have lived in China
do we know what
we know?
around the same time period.21 But, within the discipline of philosophy
there are subdisciplines or branches within the field of knowledge. For
metaphysics purposes of brevity, I will discuss just a few of those branches.
(or ontology) deals
with questions of
reality: What is The first is epistemology, which includes questions about knowledge,
appearance and
what is real?
such as: What is knowledge? and How do we know what we know? Is
something the truth or is it an opinion? A second branch of philosophy
axiology is metaphysics or ontology. Metaphysics (ontology) deals with questions
is the branch of
philosophy which of reality: What is appearance and what is real? What kind of reality does
deals with the study the universe have—it is mind or matter or some kind of spiritual being?
of values.
What kind of reality do you have as a human being?22 In addition, it raises
political questions about our existence, such as: Are our lives predetermined or
philosophy do we have free will?
the examination of
social values and
the justification of Axiology is the branch of philosophy that deals with the study of values,
various political which is why we have political philosophy, the examination of social
institutions and
political relations values and the justification of various political institutions and political
relations, as well as aesthetics, which is the philosophy of art or the
aesthetics value of beauty.23 This then leads to another form of philosophy, ethics.
basically the philos-
ophy of art or the Whereas morality looks at what is right or wrong and focuses upon the
value of beauty. standards of morality, ethics is the study of examining these standards
ethics and why something may be right or wrong. So, morality may determine
is a branch of that it is wrong to steal something from another human being. Yet, the
philosophy which
identifies why and if
study of ethics would look at why it is wrong to steal from another and
a particular moral whether it could be justifiable to steal from another person in a certain
standard should be situation (e.g., stealing a rowboat to save a child from drowning).
a moral standard.

Logic The last branch of philosophy for our purposes of discussion is logic,
a specialized branch first discovered by Aristotle in the fourth century BCE, it is a specialized
of philosophical
science first discov- branch of philosophical science that examines the science of valid defense.24
ered by Aristotle in One example would be as follows:
the fourth century
B.C.E. which exam-
ines the science of
valid defenses.

14 Conducting Business Ethically

 All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal. 25

If the first statements (called premises) are valid, then the final statement
is valid (conclusion). Although, this is an elementary example, and
the study of logic is more complex, by using logic when determining
whether or not an action is moral, the discipline of ethics becomes more
plausible. Next, we will explore some of the earlier Greek philosophers.

The First Philosophers

The first or pre-Socratic philosophers were credited with two
developments: (1) enabling others to understand the world by their use of
reason, without referring to religion and (2) encouraging their followers
to use their own reason by thinking for themselves.26 As a result, they philosopher
were the first teachers who did not teach dogmatically (unquestioned one who looks for
a rational expla-
beliefs) but taught their students to discuss, argue, debate, and put their nation of his ex-
own ideas forward, in order to be scrutinized by others.27 Some of these perience of reality,
who tries to grasp
earlier philosophers who will be briefly discussed in this next section
the real as a matter
are Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes of Miletus; Pythagoras of of understanding,
Samos; Heraclitus; and Parmenides. Because most early philosophers as opposed…to a
magical, mythical,
were men, following the first six pre-Socratics, we will review three fictional…explana-
female pre-BCE philosophers: Arignote of Samos, Aesara of Lucania, tion of things.
and Perictione I and II.

Thales of Miletus
In ancient history, seven men have been called
sages or wise men and Thales was one of the first; he
shared this title with Solon, Periander, Cleobulus,
Chilon, Bias, and Pittacus.28 Thales of Miletus
(625–545 BCE)29 was recognized generally as the
© happydancing/Shutterstock, Inc.

first in history to define philosophy and did so by

defining a philosopher as “one who looks for a
rational explanation of his experience of reality, who
tries to grasp the real as a matter of understanding,

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 15

 as opposed…to a magical, mythical, fictional…explanation of things.”30
The philosophical question that challenged Thales was: “What is the
world made of?”31 Although we now know that all material objects are
reduced to energy, Thales believed the world was made of water and that
the earth floated on a body of water, which was unbounded (not infinite
since the concept had not yet created), and since life depended upon
water, the source of all things had to have been water.32

It has been said that Thales was the first to believe in the immortality of
the soul, as well as being credited for declaring one of the most historical
proverbs in philosophy as a response to the question, “What is most
difficult?” in which he replied, “to know oneself ”33 Interestingly, some
have credited Socrates with the proverb “Know thyself,” but many have
attributed it to Thales.34 In addition, according to historical accounts of
his life, it has been said that Thales discovered the seasons of the year,
divided it into 365 days, and predicted the eclipses of the sun.35

Yet, Thales was somewhat of an eccentric. There is one story in which he

said that there were three blessings for which he was grateful to fortune:
“first, that I was born a human being and not one of the brutes; next,
that I was born a man and not a woman; thirdly, that I was born a Greek
and not a barbarian.”36 There is a tale that once Thales accompanied a
woman to observe the stars, but he fell into a ditch because he was not
looking around, and his cry for help drew this retort, “How can you
expect to know all about the heavens, Thales, when you cannot even see
what is before your feet?”37

However, it should be pointed out that philosophy is, among other

things, “the attempt to find a single intuition of being, a single system
of reality, that will synthesize and hold together the many facets of our
specialized knowledge and social structure”38 Although there was never
any proof that Thales wrote anything, and his belief that water is what
held everything together eventually in time proved wrong, he was the
first person to be concerned with looking for explanations in terms of
causal relationships between bodies in space and time, rather than solely
a subjective association of ideas and will always be remembered for this
innovative thinking.39

16 Conducting Business Ethically

Anaximander and Anaximenes of Miletus
As a pupil of Thales, the Milesian, Anaximander, was born around 611
BCE and is credited with being the first Greek to make a map, develop
an instrument in the form of a sundial to measure off the seasons in
Sparta, and engineer various types of models to duplicate and study the
regularities of nature.40 This is believed to have led him to the more
general idea that nature is regular and predictable, which he believed
was natural law.41 Furthermore, although he had agreed with Thales
in thinking that there is a common substance of which all things are
composed, it was not water, but a “boundless something” (apeiron) that
contained every sort of shape and quality and was without any definition
or specific characteristics of its own.42

Anaximander believed everything real in matter had definite qualities,

where it would be hot in some cases, cold in others, sometimes wet,
sometimes dry; however, these qualities were always in pairs.43 He felt that
these opposites were warring with each other such as winter (the moist
and cold) against the summer (hot and dry); the cycle of the seasons,
and perhaps the day and night.44 In addition, he believed the earth to
be in the center of the universe. However, it is this concept of opposites
that had contemporary implications. The following quote epitomizes
Anaximander’s concept of opposites: “according to necessity; for they pay
penalty and retribution to each other for their injustice according to the
assessment of Time.”45 This has been used in modern-day tort law where
the injury of one individual is compensated by the party responsible
for the injury. So, if you steal $1,000 from your employer, you would
be responsible for paying back that employer $1,000 (and perhaps the
interest lost during the time you possessed the employer’s funds). Even
if you wanted to apply it to criminal law, suppose someone stole $1,000
and it would take a person a month to earn it, the criminal who stole the
money and could not repay it should spend a month in jail, which would
be an appropriate penalty in terms of time to compensate for the crime.
Oddly enough, this could be classified as an ethical concept.

Another early philosopher, Anaximenes, also from the Ionian region

and a citizen of Milesia, was a protégé of Anaximander but believed that

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 17

 all things originated from air.46 Anaximenes believed that when rarefied
(made less dense), air became fire and when condensed it became wind,
then cloud, then water, then earth, and then stone; so as condensation
was a source of cold, rarefaction was a source of heat and because of his
primary focus with the natural world, he was known as a “cosmologist,”
like Thales and Anaximander.47 His theory of air was based upon an
empirical argument of rarefaction: breath blown through compressed
lips is cold, but with the mouth open, it becomes warm.”48 The next
philosopher, Pythagoras, finds another solution to the question, What
is the world made of?

Pythagoras
Pythagoras believed that the fundamental principles of the universe were
derived from mathematical relations (a precursor to Albert Einstein’s
thinking a millennium later).49 Pythagoras is believed to have been
born on Samos, an island off Miletus, on the Asia-Minor coast of what
is now Turkey around 570 BCE and died in 497 BCE.50 Although it is
agreed that his mother was Pythias, there is a myth that Pythagoras’s
father was the son of Apollo.51 However, most believed his father was
Mnesarchus, husband to Pythias.52 Pythagoras is thought to be the first
person who invented the term “philosophy” and who first applied the
word “cosmos” to the universe.53

Pythagoras believed that real things and their relationships are somehow
expressible by numbers, if they are not numbers themselves.54 He
believed there was a direct correlation between the unity of numbers and
the unity of the universe.55 To validate this, Pythagoras observed that the
interval between notes on the musical scale was expressed numerically,
depending on the length of string required to produce these notes or
sounds. He reasoned, if the physical length and tone were expressed by
numbers, why can’t the rest of the universe have this same relationship
to numbers? 56

Pythagoras founded a religious community with a set of ascetic and

ceremonial rules, the most famous of which was the prohibition of the
eating of beans.57 He taught the doctrine of transmigration of souls,

18 Conducting Business Ethically

which is the belief that human beings had souls separable from their
bodies, and at death a person’s soul enters another body, not necessarily
that of a human.58

There is an anecdote that Pythagoras intervened in the beating of a

dog by saying, “Stop! Cease your beating, because this is really the soul
of a man who was my friend: I recognized it as I heard it cry aloud.”59
Pythagoras believed not only in the immortality of the soul but by
following these religious rules you are pursuing holiness, which in turn
means the pursuit of purification whereby the soul is released from the
body.60 In addition, he contended that final perfection comes when
the soul is freed from the body and united or reunited with the One
(Unity).61a

Pythagoras is known for several quotes, but this one demonstrates the
importance of higher level thinking and is found in a book by Diogenes
Laërtius: “the soul of a man is divided into three parts, intelligence,
reason, and passion. Intelligence and passion are possessed by other
animals, but reason by man alone.”61b Later, in Chapter Four, you
may notice how this resembles the thinking of the nineteenth-century
philosopher, John Stuart Mill. Basically, this brings reasoning into the
discussion of ethics and morals and how humankind is superior to
lower level animals, in this respect.

Heraclitus
Heraclitus was born circa 540 BCE in Ephesus and died around 480
BCE.62 He was considered to be the most famous of the early Ionian
philosophers based upon his often quoted statement, “You cannot step
into the same river, for other waters are continually flowing on.” This
statement has been interpreted to mean that everything (e.g., truth,
knowledge) is in a constant state of flux.63 Given this statement is
true and all things are in constant motion, Heraclitus then raised two
questions: “What is the source of this unified motion?” and “What is the
agency (means) where movement is provided?”64

His view of the universe focused upon a concept that he termed “logos”—
an untranslatable word which means “word”—but has connotations of

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 19

 proportion and measure.65 Historically, it has also been translated to
mean “law, reason, intelligence, and wisdom.”66 But regardless of its
exact meaning, according to Heraclitus, the logos was the first principle
of knowledge to the understanding of the world and represented a
structure or pattern of the world, which was concealed from the
eyes of an ordinary person.67 This could be seen as the first seeds of
epistemological thought, a branch of philosophy not yet developed.

Heraclitus also believed that the logos was the first principle of existence
and that the unity of the world as we know it is a process of maintaining
a balance between tightening and retracting, much like the shooting of
a bow and arrow.68 His vision of the universe was that enemies sustain
their hate through their animosity toward each other much like war,
which is inseparable to peace; therefore, we must continue to fight our
enemies in order to attain peace.

He also thought the three principal elements of nature were fire, earth,
and water. However, of the three, he believed that fire was the primary
element controlling and modifying the other two.69 In Heraclitus’s
cosmology, fire had the role that water had for Thales and that air had
for Anaximenes.70 Furthermore, he believed that the virtuous soul
could survive the death of its physical body and eventually would
rejoin the cosmic fire.71 Curiously, the process of separation and unity
(exemplifying Heraclitus’s opposites) mirrored the Eastern philosophical
concept of the yin and yang and demonstrated that the dynamism
between opposites was the driving force for the external conditions of
the universe.72 Is it possible that this was the planting of another seed for
a branch in philosophy called metaphysics, which examines the nature
of one’s existence? The next philosopher we will discuss is considered
to be the founder of metaphysics. His name is Parmenides.

Parmenides
Although not much is known of Parmenides’ life, it is believed that he
was born around 510 BCE, died circa 440 BCE, and was originally from
Elea, a Greek city on the coast of Italy.73 Unlike his predecessors, instead
of devoting himself to cosmology, Parmenides dedicated his study to
metaphysics, or “the study of issues beyond the physical world such as:
20 Conducting Business Ethically
the meaning of life, the existence of free will, the nature of the mind,
and the possibility of life after death.”74 His works influenced Plato who
dedicated one of his writings, Parmenides, on his behalf.

Whereas Heraclitus argued that everything changes and denied that

anything can stay the same or that permanence exists in the world,
Parmenides believed that permanence is the fundamental character of
reality.75 He believed that reality must be eternal and unchanging and
therefore the changing world of our experience cannot be real and is
actually an illusion.76 In his poem, “Way of Truth,” a goddess reveals to
Parmenides that “the unshaken heart of well rounded Truth,” is actually
reality and that “the opinions of mortals in which is not true belief
at all,” are the changing untruths.77 Parmenides’ distinction between
appearance and reality and between opinion and knowledge led to
Plato’s doctrine that the sensible world is lower in degree of reality than
the world of intelligence.78

In the English language just as we tend to use the same word such as
“dying” as a verb (he is dying) or as a noun (the dying), the Greeks did
the same thing but more often. So, when the Greek philosophers would
write “being” as a noun or as a verb “to be,” it could be quite confusing
especially since there are translations involved as well. To distinguish the
difference between the noun and the verb, when discussing Parmenides’
topic “being” it will be written with a capital B meaning whatever is
engaged in being (as opposed to “being” in lowercase letters, which
indicates “to be”).79

Now back to Parmenides, what did he mean by “Being” (for something

to be)? When Parmenides refers to Being, he defines it as more than
just existing. In the first four lines of his poem, which follows below,
Parmenides believes if Being is that of which something is true (be / is),
then Unbeing is that of which nothing is true, in other words, cannot
exist (cannot be / is not):

What you can call and think must Being be

For Being can, and nothing cannot, be.

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 21

 Never shall this prevail that Unbeing is;
Rein in your mind from any thought like this.

Unbeing you won’t grasp—it can’t be done—

Nor utter; being thought and being are one. 80

However, if something does not exist, it must be something or else it

cannot be thought of. For example, have you ever been “daydreaming”
and someone asks what you have been thinking about and you say
nothing or you cannot remember? So, does this mean that because you
do not remember what you were thinking it did not exist? And, if it did
exist, how can nothing exist?

Where many have accepted the principle “nothing can come from
nothing,” Parmenides expanded this by believing that Being has no
beginning and no end and cannot be subject to change. 81

Where Heraclitus may have believed that when water boils it changes to
air, it is the death of water and the birth of air; while for Parmenides it
is not changing from a Being to an Unbeing but changes within Being
not changes of Being.82 Therefore, Being is real or truth which is why
one part of his poem is entitled “Way of Truth,” while the world of
senses or change was reflected in the second part of his poem, “Way of
Seeming.”83 The question now facing many philosophers is which of the
two theorists were correct, Heraclitus or Parmenides?

In early Greek history, there was a group of sages or wisemen called

Sophos, who freely gave out their wisdom and would practice what
many considered the earlier stages of philosophy throughout each of
their wakening moments. Their predecessors, known as Sophists, were
paid to help their students think philosophically; and since these iterant
philosophers traveled from place to place to find students who would
pay fees for their services, the word sophisticated resulted from them.
The next chapter will discuss some of these Sophists.

22 Conducting Business Ethically

Arignote
Women were part of the Pythagorean societies and have been believed to
play a major role in the development of early Pythagorean philosophy.84
Scholars believe that Pythagoras developed much of his philosophical
doctrines from Themistoclea, the priestess at Delphi (circa 600 BCE).85
Arignote, daughter of Pythagoras, describes how mathematical
relationships can link what is real with all that exists:

..the eternal essence of number is the most providential

(n.b. the guardianship of G-d over his creatures) cause
of the whole heaven, earth and the region in between.
Likewise it is the root of the continued existence of the
gods and daimones (demons), as well as that of divine
men.86

Arignote was born in 500 BCE, and was educated in the Pythagorean
School known for the study of mathematics and its role in the order of
the universe, which includes astronomy.87 Not much is known about
Arignote except that she believed the numbers 1,2,3, and 4 and their
relationships to other numbers support her philosophy that the numbers
are central to the origin of all order. She wrote on behalf of her mentor,
as did many disciples of the time, which in this case was her father.88

Aesara
Aesara was a Pythagorean philosopher born in Lucania, the southern
part of Italy, sometime between 425 and 100 BCE, during the time
when it was believed that her fragment of work, On Human Nature,
was written.89 The passage that appears below describes her philosophy
of the tripartite (divided into three parts) of the human soul, which
consists of reason or mind, spiritedness, and desire.90

Human nature seems to me to provide a standard of

law and justice both for the home and for the city. By
following the tracks within himself whoever seeks will
make a discovery; law is in him and justice, which is
the orderly arrangement of the soul. Being threefold,

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 23

 it is organized in accordance with triple functions:
that which effects judgment and thoughtfulness is (the
mind), that which effects strength and ability (high
spirit), and that which effects love and kindliness is
desire.These are all so disposed relatively to one another
that the best part is in command, the most inferior is
governed, and the one in between holds a middle place;
it both governs and is governed.91

Aesara believed that it is important to understand the three parts of the

soul. She believed that one part should not dominate another part for
harmony to occur for an individual, family, or society. For example, if
you need to lease an automobile as transportation to school or work,
using reason, it would be better to lease a 2015 Jeep Wrangler than a
1999 Jeep Wrangler with over 250,000 miles, with poor brakes and a
mechanically unsound transmission. If you would enjoy driving the
new Jeep, knowing it was dependable and affordable, your desire to work
overtime would be a good choice. Your spirited part would make sure
you lease something you could afford and not let your passion to lease a
$1.7 million 2015 Bugatti Veyron 16.4 automobile be dominated by the
desire part.

Perictione
Many scholars question whether Perictione was Plato’s mother or a
student of Plato.92 Although it is believed there were two writings by
a Perictione, one called “On the Harmony of Women” (Perictione I)
and the other “On Wisdom” (Perictione II), we will concentrate on the
first work by Perictione I. The passage below originates from “On the
Harmony of Women,” written by Periction I:

One must deem the harmonious woman to be full of

wisdom and self control; a soul must be exceedingly
conscious of goodness to be just and courageous and
wise, embellished with self-sufficiency and hating empty
opinion. Worthwhile things come to a woman from
these..if..such a woman should govern cities and tribes…

24 Conducting Business Ethically

 Having mastery over appetite and high feeling she will
be righteous and harmonious; no lawless desires will
impel her. …Women who eat and drink every costly
thing, who dress extravagantly..are ready for the sin of
every vice….The woman who seeks these things seeks
these things an admirer of feminine weakness. It is
beauty that comes from wisdom, not from these things,
that gratifies women who are well born.93

In this passage, Perictione addresses what a woman must do to be moral

and at the same establishes her beliefs that women have the ability
to rule their cities as well. It should also be noted that moderation or
temperance is included in this philosophy, which was also espoused by
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Perictione establishes the philosophy that
excess is a vice and wisdom is more important than one’s attire. Perhaps
one could say, it is the woman who makes the clothes, not the clothes
that makes the woman.

“On the Harmony of Woman” was written sometime between 425 and
300 BCE, when some scholars believe her brother (Charmides) and uncle
(Critas), both friends of Socrates, were listed as the “Thirty Tyrants” who
ruled Athens during the brief oligarchy at the end of the Peloponnesian
War. Perictione and her husband Ariston (Plato’s father) had four children:
Ademantus, Glaucon, Plato, and Potone (their only girl).94

Potone became the mother of Speusippus, who eventually took over

Plato’s Academy upon his death, instead of Plato’s best student Aristotle
who was not born in Athens.95

Although little is known about the other Perictione (II), including her
actual name, she is credited with writing “On Wisdom,” which discusses
the importance of mathematics and its relationship to the world.
However, this fragment from her essay below establishes the belief of
humankind’s contemplation as an avenue to wisdom:

Mankind came into being and exists in order to

contemplate the principle of the nature of the whole.

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 25

 The function of wisdom is to gain this very thing….
It is appropriate to wisdom to be able to see and to
contemplate those attributes which below universally
to all things…wisdom searches for the basic principles
of all things….Therefore…this person seems to be the
wisest and most true and, moreover, to have discovered
a noble height…96

Summary
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that examines the reasons why certain
actions are considered moral. However, it first must be determined what
the values are of the decision maker in order to better understand why
one action was taken compared to another action for the same situation.
Values are what are considered to be important to an individual. The
next step is to identify the reasons certain actions or even values would
be categorized in terms of moral development. Two psychologists—
Lawrence Kohlberg and his protégé Carol Gilligan—identified what they
believed to be three different levels of moral development; Kohlberg’s
subjects were male and Gilligan’s were female. Although the outcome
was different depending upon which model was used, another question
arises: What can you use as a moral standard to determine whether one
individual’s value is better than another individual’s value?

After assessing some moral standards, such as biblical or religious law,

Constitutional or state law, moral realism, guilt and moral relativism,
and recognizing conflict in all of these standards, the best approach to
decision making is to apply universally accepted philosophies when
measuring whether a particular action would be categorized a being
ethical.

Branches of philosophy include metaphysics, epistemology, axiology,

aesthetics, ethics, and logic, among others. Early male philosophers
helped to shape the modern-day discipline of philosophy. The first
was Thales, considered by many to be one of the seven sages or
wisemen. He questioned what the universe consisted of, and ultimately
came up with the solution that everything was comprised of water.
26 Conducting Business Ethically
Anaximander believed that the universe was made up of a “boundless
something” (apeiron) which contained every sort of shape and quality
and was without any definition or specific characteristics of its own.
Anaximenes, a protégé of Anaximander, disagreed with his mentor
and believed that all things originated from air. Another philosopher,
Pythagoras, believed that the fundamental principles of the universe
were derived from mathematical relations. Philosopher Heraclitus
raised two questions: What is the source of this unified motion, and
what is the agency (means) where movement is provided? He believed
that everything changed from earth, fire, and water, but fire was the
primary source of change. Parmenides believed that everything, like the
truth, did not change and whatever changes would not be real or an
illusion. This was the basis for a later known philosopher, by the name
of Plato, who used these concepts to further the theories.

In terms of female philosophers, Pythagoras’s daughter, Arignote,

supported the belief in the importance of numbers and their relationship
to the origin of the natural world and causal effects. Aesara of Lucania
believed that for harmony to occur between an individual and family
or society, the three parts of the soul (reason, desire, and spirit) must
be equally applied when making a decision, for allowing one part to
dominate another part, could have a detrimental effect on the outcome.
Another philosopher, Perictione I, addressed what a woman must do to
be moral and at the same established her beliefs that women have the
ability to rule their cities as well. Perictione II established the belief of
humankind’s contemplation as an avenue to wisdom, thus concluding
this section on first philosophers.

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 27

Key Terms
Aesthetics: basically, the philosophy of art or explanation of things; means a lover of
the value of beauty. wisdom.
Axiology: the branch of philosophy that Philosophy: a discipline in which
deals with the study of values. philosophers continue to question the
Conventional level: according to Kohlberg’s assumptions behind every claim and
model, it is based upon when you are the most basic beliefs about reality, and
making a decision. The deciding factor then to critically examine those beliefs.
is what others think of your decision. Political philosophy: the examination
(What will other people think?) In of social values and the justification
Gilligan’s model, it is based upon doing of various political institutions and
what is best for others and detrimentally political relations.
neglecting yourself. Postconventional level: according to the
Epistemology: includes questions about Kohlberg model, the determining factor
knowledge, such as: What is knowledge? when making a decision is based upon
and How do we know what we know? a higher level of development when
Ethical dilemma: a situation or decision you act in a manner for the good of
affecting others when there may not be humankind, and your motivation is not
an obvious solution in terms of what is for any personal reward or motivated by
the right thing to do. what others may think. In the Gilligan
Ethics: a branch of philosophy that identifies model, it is putting yourself ahead
why and if a particular moral standard of others, not to be selfish but to be
should be a moral standard. selfless.
Logic: a specialized branch of philosophical Preconventional level: based upon when
science first discovered by Aristotle in you are making decisions in which
the fourth century BCE which examines the determining factor is how you
the science of valid defenses. are benefited by that decision (i.e.,
Metaphysics (or ontology): deals with motivated by selfishness).
questions of reality: What is Values: ideals you believe in and are then
appearance? and What is real? compared to one or more moral
Philosopher: one who looks for a rational standards, which would enable you
explanation of his or her experience of to make the most ethical choice (e.g.,
reality, who tries to grasp the real as a friendship, religion, money).
matter of understanding, as opposed
to a magical, mythical, fictional

28 Conducting Business Ethically

Chapter Review Questions
1. What is philosophy? How does Andrew Bailey define philosophy in this chapter?
2. What are some of the branches of philosophy? Define at least two of them.
3. Why can we rely more on universal philosophies to use as moral standards than on biblical
or religious law, constitutional or state laws, moral realism, guilt, or moral relativism?
Explain the advantage of using universal philosophies and give examples of why some of
the others may not be used by everyone.
4. How does Kohlberg’s theory differ from Gilligan’s theory of moral development? Discuss
specifically why the female subjects scored lower in their moral development using
Kohlberg’s model and higher using Gilligan’s model.
5. Who are some of the first philosophers and how did their philosophies differ? Respond to
this question by describing the philosophies of at least three of these philosophers.

Case Review Questions

Answer the following from “The Shallow Pond” found on page 1.
1. Would you save the child or attend the lecture on time? Explain your response.
2. If your weekly lecture was being observed by your Department Chair in order to make
a decision on tenure for a Board meeting the following day (a decision on tenure means
either you earn a permanent position with the college or you lose your job), would you still
save the child? Explain your response.
3. What if the job market was so poor and your were the sole wage earner for your family of
four, that being rejected for tenure would lead to unemployment, would you still save the
child? Explain your response.

Answer the following from “The Envelope” found on page 2.

1. Would you send the $100 if you had the money? If not, why were you willing to save one
child from drowning in a pond but not save the thirty children by donating $100? Explain
your responses.
2. Which of your values played a role in your decisions?
3. Which of your values played a role in your decisions for the “The Shallow Pond”?
4. Did the values used in “The Shallow Pond” conflict with those from “The Envelope”? If so,
how can you justify this conflict?

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 29

Answer the following from “The Alligator River Story” found on page 5.
1. Who do you think was the most moral? Why?
2. Who do you think was the least moral? Why?
3. List in order of morality (the most moral first, the next most moral person second) all five
of the characters. Then, compare your list with other members in the class. Can you come
to a consensus?

Endnotes
1a
“The Shallow Pond” was found in Peter Unger’s 17
Encyclopedia of Psychology. Guilt. 2nd ed. Ed.
Living High and Letting Die (New York: Bonnie R. Strickland. Gale Group, Inc., 2001.
Oxford Press, 1996), p. 9. 18
Michael J. Sandel, Liberalism and Its Critics:
1b
Ibid. (modified by author). Readings in Political and Social Theory (New
2
Luis E. Navia, Diogenes of Sinope: The Man in the York: New York University Press, 1984), p. 1.
Tub (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998), 19
Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics
p. 159. of Morals, H.J. Patton, trans. (New York:
3
Plato, Plato Complete Works, John Cooper, Ed. Harper & Row Publishers, 1964), p. 96.
(Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 20
Andrew Bailey (Ed.), First Philosophy (Ontario:
Inc., 1997), p. 33. Broadview Press, 2002), p. 3.
4
Sidney B. Simon, Leland W. Howe, and Howard 21
Ibid., 1.
Kirschenbaum, Values Clarification: A 22
T.Z. Lavine, From Socrates to Sartre: The
Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers Philosophical Quest (New York: Bantam
and Students (New York: Hart Publishing Books, 1984), p. 1.
Company, Inc., 1972), pp. 291-292. 23
Donald Palmer, Does the Center Hold? An
5
Lawrence Kohlberg and Richard H. Hersh, Introduction to Western Philosophy (Boston:
“Moral Development: A Review of Theory,” McGraw Hill, 2002), p. 21.
Theory Into Practice, Vol. 16, No. 2, April 24
Ibid., 20.
1977, p. 54. 25
Ibid.
6
Ibid., 54-55. 26
Bryan Magee, The Story of Philosophy (New
7
Ibid., 55. York: Dorling Kindersley, 1998), p. 12.
8
Ibid. 27
Ibid.
9
Ibid. 28
Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent
10
Ibid. Philosophers, R.D. Hicks, trans. (Cambridge:
11
Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1925/1959), p. 15.
Harvard University Press, 1982), p. 73. 29
Jonathan Barnes, Early Greek Philosophy (New
12
Ibid., 74. York: Penguin Group, 1987/2001), p. 9.
13
Ibid. 30
Albert B. Hakim, Historical Introduction to
14
Ibid., 82. Philosophy, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
15
Ibid., 82-83. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006), pp. 12-13.
16
Ibid., 74, 84.

30 Conducting Business Ethically

31
Bryan Magee, The Story of Philosophy (New 55
Ibid., 13-14.
York: Dorling Kindersley, 1998), p. 12. 56
Ibid., 14.
32
Ibid, 2. 57
Anthony Kenny, A Brief History of Western
33
Ibid, 25, 37. Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers,
34
Ibid, 41. 1998), p. 1.
35
Ibid, 25, 28, 29. 58
Ibid.
36
Ibid., 35. 59
Albert B. Hakim, Historical Introduction to
37
Ibid. Philosophy, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
38
Robert S. Brumbaugh, The Philosophers of Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2006), p. 14.
Greece (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell 60
Ibid.
Company, 1964), p. 13. 61a
Ibid.
39
W.K.C. Gutherie, A History of Greek Philosophy, 61b
Diogenes Laërtius, Lives and Opinions of
Vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge at the Eminent Philosophers, “Pythagoras”, Sect.
University Press, 1967), pp. 53-54. 30, in the translation of C.D. Yonge (1853).
40
Diogenes Laertus, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/
R.D. Hicks, trans. (Cambridge: Harvard text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.0
University Press, 1925/1959), p. 131. 1.0258%3Abook%3D8%3Achapter%3D1
41
Ibid., 23. 62
Op.cit., 48.
42
Ibid., 20. 63
John Chafee, The Philosopher’s Way: Thinking
43
Ibid. Critically About Profound Ideas (Upper Saddle
44
Reginald E. Allen, Greek Philosophy: Thales to River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2005), p.
Aristotle (New York: Free Press, 1991), p. 30. 420.
45
Ibid. 64
Albert B. Hakim, Historical Introduction to
46
Anthony Kenny, A Brief History of Western Philosophy, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2006), p. 15.
1998), p. 4. 65
Reginald E. Allen (Ed.), Greek Philosophy:
47
Reginald E. Allen (Ed.), Greek Philosophy: Thales to Aristotle, 3rd ed. (New York: The
Thales to Aristotle, 3rd ed. (New York: The Free Press, 1991), p. 7.
Free Press, 1991), p. 4. 66
Albert B. Hakim, Historical Introduction to
48
Ibid. Philosophy, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River:
49
John Chafee, The Philosopher’s Way: Thinking Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2006), p. 16.
Critically About Profound Ideas (Upper Saddle 67
Reginald E. Allen (Ed.), Greek Philosophy:
River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2005), p. 48. Thales to Aristotle, 3rd ed. (New York: The
50
Bryan Magee, The Story of Philosophy (New Free Press, 1991), p. 9.
York: Dorling Kindersley, 1998), p. 15. 68
Ibid.
51
Kitty Ferguson, The Music of Pythagoras (New 69
Philip Stokes, Philosophy: 100 Essential Thinkers
York: Walker and Company, 2008), pp. 10-11. (New York: Enchanted Lion Books, 2003), p. 15.
52
Ibid., 11. 70
Anthony Kenny, A Brief History of Western
53
Bryan Magee, The Story of Philosophy (New Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers,
York: Dorling Kindersley, 1998), p. 15. 1998), p. 6.
54
Albert B. Hakim, Historical Introduction to 71
Philip Stokes, Philosophy: 100 Essential Thinkers
Philosophy, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: (New York: Enchanted Lion Books, 2003),
Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2006), p. 15. p. 15.

CHAPTER 1 LEARNING TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER 31

72
Ibid. 85
Ibid., 1, 11.
73
Ibid., 16. 86
Ibid., 12.
74
John Chafee, The Philosopher’s Way: Thinking 87
“Arignote (fl. 6th c. BCE),” Women in World
Critically About Profound Ideas (Upper Saddle History: A Biographical Encyclopedia, 2002.
River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2005), p. 22. Encyclopedia.com. 22 Feb. 2015. http://www.
75
T.Z. Lavine, From Socrates to Sartre: The encyclopedia.com
Philosophical Quest (New York: Bantam 88
Ibid.
Books, 1984), p. 24. 89
Kate Lindemann, Aesara of Lucania, Society for
76
John Chafee, The Philosopher’s Way: Thinking the Study of Women Philosophers. n.d. Web.
Critically About Profound Ideas (Upper Saddle 22 Feb. 2015. http://www.societyforthe
River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2005), p. 22. studyofwomenphilosophers.org/Aesara_
77
Reginald E. Allen (Ed.), Greek Philosophy: Lucania.html
Thales to Aristotle, 3rd ed. (New York: The 90
Ibid.
Free Press, 1991), p. 10. 91
Mary Ellen Waithe, A History of Women
78
Ibid., 11. Philosophers, vol. 1 / 6000BC-500AD
79
Anthony Kenny, A Brief History of Western (Hingham, MA: Kluwer Academic
Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Publishers, 1987), p. 20.
1998), pp. 8-9. 92
Ibid., 71.
80
Ibid., 9-10. 93
Ibid., 32-33.
81
Ibid., 11. 94
Op.cit.
82
Ibid. 95
Ibid.
83
Ibid. 96
Ibid.
84
Mary Ellen Waithe, A History of Women
Philosophers, vol. 1 / 6000BC-500AD
(Hingham, MA: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1987), p. 11.

32 Conducting Business Ethically